The problem is that physics appears to be leading us not to resolution but into an Alice in Wonderland world of increasingly bizarre theories, each farther removed than the last from our experience of the everyday world.

Or at any rate, makes us wonder exactly what our "experience of the everyday world" really is...I honestly was not expecting to be as intrigued by this book as I have found myself to be. I was expecting an adventure/romance/sci-fi fairly lightweight read (sorry,Tim-) and have been delighted to find real questions to ponder - not about the characters so much, though that is entertaining, but about the nature of reality. Good stuff.

Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming -
Wow! What a ride!

Not to bring you back to the harshness of reality, but did you all see Kaku on the news being interviewed about the nuclear power plant situation in Japan? It was weird seeing him on the ABC Nightly News in that place and time and NOT talking about string theory.

You can't judge a book by its cover.

The only thing that matters is the ending. It's the most important part of the story.

Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming -

Liz wrote:Not to bring you back to the harshness of reality, but did you all see Kaku on the news being interviewed about the nuclear power plant situation in Japan? It was weird seeing him on the ABC Nightly News in that place and time and NOT talking about string theory.

I also saw him and listened a bit closer to what he had to say.

"If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went." Will Rogers

Firefly, WOW! I wish I had gone back and re-read it. The number 7 went right over my head.

I’ve been thinking about the whole time/motion issue. And I think that maybe that the point was to give us a sense of what the fountain of youth does…..it stops time. In other words, if you aren’t getting any older then time is stopping for you.

I personally think that the journey was more interesting than reaching the destination. I found the fountain to be almost anti-climactic.

Nebraska, you are so right. That would be another comparison to the POTC movies. I need to go back and add some more comparisons to that question.

Didn't CJS say exactly that in one of the trailers?

I forgot to look into this until now. And well fancy that! I had no idea. I just now went to look up the trailer (research for ONBC is a tough job, but it had to be done.)

So I found out that he actually said: "It's not the destination as much as the journey."

Would any of you be interested in checking me to make sure that I am accurate?

[youtube]wukFJEvke7E[/youtube]

You can't judge a book by its cover.

The only thing that matters is the ending. It's the most important part of the story.

I did a (very) quick search on string theory, and while I get the general ideas of it, I have some questions that may/ may not have to do with that. I also missed the Parallel Universe discussions you all had, so I didn't know if this was the time or place to revisit/ open up that discussion again. I don't know how close my thoughts are to any previous discussions, so if I am way off base, please disregard this post!

First, I think time in our world exists for creation--even though many times it seems the other way around! As humans are part of creation, we are finite creatures who need systems and ways to measure our lives, beginnings and ends. I'm not sure if these ideas even apply/ can be used in regards to OST, but what if time were more like a slinky or a double helix where there are cycles, (since most things in nature have a spiral motion or repeated cycles like the weather, orbits, even the way water flushes :P) and yes, where one strand was parallel to another but with connecting strands to provide movement from one to the other? I'd like to think that would be a way to explain parallel worlds, and even "ghosts" or "spirits." We are living in one world/ our "reality" governed by laws for our benefit, and they are in theirs, and occasionally, our worlds collide/ connect. A question I thought of is would we be considered as "ghosts" to the "ghosts" too? Would they think they are "real" and that we are specters/ phantoms? There are lots of ways to say that one has "crossed over." The question I have would be at what point are beings not allowed to cross "back"? We have many "near death" reports or "revived from death" where people testify of entering/ crossing into other realms. I've explained death to kids as saying it's as if someone has walked through a door to the other side where just because you can't see them doesn't mean they've ceased to exist.

As far as motion goes, it seems fair to say that, logically, that its existence is entirely dependent on whether or not it has something to act upon- tangible or otherwise. Also, motion cannot act independently; it cannot create. It relies on something or someone to cause it to exist; it is the result of some other force working on another. With those ideas in mind, my question, firefly, is what if motion bends logic, like time, and is not dependent or subject to our world's laws, but is an entity and driving force of its own in Jack's world?

Sorry for this, you guys. It's very late where I am, and this may not make any sense at all, but I just wondered about these things.

Don't apologize, specktater. We can get pretty philosophical at times here at ONBC. And, as you know, we've even discussed physics, thanks to Kaku....and Charlene, who asked Johnny what he was reading....and of course, Johnny, who was reading it.

But I personally need to mull this over for a while as my brain is dead after having been immersed in such topics as characterization, IP re-use, FPGAs, SPICE and DFT/DSM all day long. String theory was easy compared to this stuff. I'm serious. Anybody in the EDA biz here?

You can't judge a book by its cover.

The only thing that matters is the ending. It's the most important part of the story.

specktater, thanks for your post! You definitely should go back and read our discussion of Parallel Worlds in the archives, which is not to say what you have posted is not releveant to this discussion, it certainly is. We have also discussed our species need for order and rational explanations of what surrounds us - Off the top of my head I would suggest digging in the ONBC archives for Good Omens, The People's Act of Love and Fierce Invalids Home from Hot Climates. I'm sure there are others where we visited this topic.

I like your statement that our world exists for creation and not the opposite - if only...

Liz, thanks for your diligent research! I think I may have to watch it many times...just to be sure!

Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming -

Yes specktater thank you for that excellent post! I don't know how I missed it! Oh my goodness I am so embarassed.

As far as motion goes, it seems fair to say that, logically, that its existence is entirely dependent on whether or not it has something to act upon- tangible or otherwise. Also, motion cannot act independently; it cannot create. It relies on something or someone to cause it to exist; it is the result of some other force working on another. With those ideas in mind, my question, firefly, is what if motion bends logic, like time, and is not dependent or subject to our world's laws, but is an entity and driving force of its own in Jack's world?

I'm not sure. The idea of motion being an entity is new to me. I am sitting here and wondering, i.e. if motion was an entity then things would would be 'moved' or powered without any action/reaction? Like Star Trek? I hadn't looked at it that way at all. Rather, I guess I was thinking as follows: what if things did not respond to the laws of motion in a standard way? So that at some point there wasn't a predictable response because the original response was based on certain conditions that are altered. And what.............................

Like you I am then immediately over my head, choking on the water if you will.

So, all we need now is a physics professor.

"Some books are to be tasted, others to be swallowed and some few to be chewed and digested." Sir Francis Bacon, Of Studies

Hi all, Once again catching up on the posts and I couldn't pass by this thread without a comment or two! Thoughts on this thead in no particular order...

Firefly - thanks for that link! I read the entire article! I let my subscription to Discover magazine lapse a couple of years ago and I do miss it. Really great mag! Of course, these topics do fascinate me - I also read The Grand Design by Hawking and Mlodinow earlier this year. Fascinating stuff! I recommend if for anyone interested in these philosophical/cosmological/theological topics.

Liz - yes, i saw Kaku on the ABC Nightly News and also on Letterman. Yes, it was weird. He has a new book out, Physics of the Future, and I actually felt sorry for him. He had probably arranged the Letterman visit in advance, planning to promote his book, but he didn't even get a chance to talk about it.

Liz wrote:But I personally need to mull this over for a while as my brain is dead after having been immersed in such topics as characterization, IP re-use, FPGAs, SPICE and DFT/DSM all day long. String theory was easy compared to this stuff. I'm serious. Anybody in the EDA biz here?

Whoa! Liz! Are you an electrical engineer?

"It's not the destination so much as the journey." Modified version of one of my favorite sayings of all time!! Adopted and loved by bikers, backpackers and travelers everywhere! (btw, That's where the 'Ramblin' of RamblinRebel comes in. Believe it or not, it's not becauase I'm naturally long-winded - though i think some of my fellow Zoners might disagree. )

Yes, major deja vu to the Parallel Worlds discussion! This quote in particular, which Firefly noted, brought me back to Schrodinger's cat, Parallel Worlds, and of course the infinate probability machine from the Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy: (OST p.182-183)"...but if you get very particular about very smallscale events, if you deal with them in such specific, needlessly obsessive detail as to almost qualify you for a lunatic asylum...you find that Newton's mechanical description of reality is only mostly correct. In tiny extents of space or time there's an element of indecisiveness, postponement of definition, and you can catch truth as loose as an underdone egg. In our normal world this isn't a big factor because the ... odds, I guess you'd say... are pretty consistent from place to place, and overwhelmingly strong in favor of Newton. But here they're not consistent. They're polarized here, though the net values are the same. There is NO elasticity in this ground, no uncertainty, and so there's a lot out here in the air."

It was that "no uncertainty", even more so than the "no motion", that really hit me. So if there is no uncertainty, then certainly there must be only one possible outcome! Thus, only one universe at this point in space-time??? Is the Fountain the place where all universes are one?

Tim, for sucessfully pulling quantum mechanics into an 18th? century pirate story! I loved it!!!